OT - Speed vs Strength teams (offense / defense) scheme discussion (WITH CONTENT!)
This is a scheme theory discussion only - all rhetorical from here on guys. Sorry for the duplicate thread earlier!
I've been a fan of football all of my life, and one of my favorite aspects is the speed vs. strength discussion, and how it applies to both offense and defensive schemes. With Gattis' recent move to the #SpeedInSpace offense coming to a hopeful fruition this year, it seemed like a fun opportunity to discuss the finer points of the Speed vs. Strength spectrum.
One of the clearest examples of the speed end of the spectrum (offensively) is the Oregon offense of the 2010's. With LaMichael James and De'Anthony Thomas as running backs, the Oregon offense utilized speed at an extreme, and challenged defenses to a track race on nearly every play. This was also during the initial trend towards hurry-up offenses, and those teams perfected it to a science. One wrong step against those offenses meant you were getting toasted, typically down the sideline.
My favorite #Manball example has to be Wisconsin (basically forever). With a continuous supply of dairy-fed linemen, this team has gone on to create the most crushing strength style of offense seen in football. While boring to most viewers, this style is extremely tough to stop, especially competing with defenses that are more geared to stopping the spread offense. It's also extremely satisfying to see 1 out of every 10-15 plays get burned over the top when the safeties begin to creep too far forward counting on the run.
Most teams prefer to incorporate some multiple elements of both their offense and defense, just in case it's needed. Teams that stay too balanced can often find pitfalls like trouble finding 'rhythm' and 'identity'. Recruiting also becomes more difficult, often a young man wants to know what style of play he'll be getting into, and how his skill set will be incorporated effectively. Nobody wants to be an elite athlete that becomes underutilized. This leads to difficulties finding depth at many positions, and only the powerhouses are able to adjust to every offense or defense with athletes ready to handle each end of the spectrum.
It becomes even more difficult to keep a specialist player sidelined for only certain occasions - Josh Uche comes to mind immediately (a player utilized for only certain styles of offense). There are countless other examples of players that have been out of the usual 'identity' of an offense / defense, but creative coaches are supposed to find ways of utilizing each player's skillset and finding mismatches.
I'm hoping our current version of #SpeedInSpace with Donovan Edwards and Blake Corum can compare to the Oregon offenses of the past, but I find it unlikely they will be able to match that end of the spectrum without a severely focused shift towards speed exclusively. My gut tells me Harbaugh will never give up his #Manball ways, and keep at least one fullback close to his heart on all rosters (Ben Mason fullback for life).
Defensively, it's obvious to compare the Big 12 to the Big 10 when it comes to speed strategies. Nearly all offenses in the Big 12 are either some iteration of spread or air raid, so defenses are tend to be much faster and geared to stop the pass. Big 10 defensive coordinators are always considering the threat of a true manball offense like Wisconsin (and Michigan / OSU respectively). Recruiting too much speed can lead to getting run over by the manball teams, and that can lead to quite the demoralizing effort (including injuries from getting pounded by large humans). Recruiting too little speed can lead to getting demoralized by fast humans, but at least you only suffer from sore hamstrings and watching Mike McCray take a wrong step against Saquon Barkley.
It looks like our recruiting of tall and rangy defensive backs that play man exclusively has been beaten by manball teams like Wisconsin, but has had success against the pass when not abusing Don Brown's limited scheme. The clearest example of this trend for Michigan's defense has been in the linebacking group, where it's much more typical to see a Devin Bush nowadays than a Mike McCray. Those McCrays of the world sure are needed against Wisconsin though!
Personally, I like to see teams take advantage of their recruiting base. It's hard to blame the Wisconsins of the world when their entire state is made up of larger humans that prefer a cow-based diet. I think Michigan should stick to a more balanced approach than one extreme or the other though. On a scale of 1 being all speed and 10 being all strength, I would expect to see a 2.5 for this year's offense. Perhaps moving more towards a 2 by year end, I would hope to see a pass first to open the run mentality from Gattis.
Schematically, I think manball offenses are still fun to watch (when it's not us getting obliterated by Wisconsin), but speed seems to be taking over the game in today's rule set. I'm interested to see how our new defense matches the teams in our conference, hopefully the switch to more zone won't leave our offense in bad situations leaving them desperate and unable to effectively utilize whichever end of the spectrum they prefer.
DISCUSS (or neg to oblivion, you have the power to decide)
April 29th, 2021 at 10:57 AM ^
The fallacy in your argument is that you think the two are mutually exclusive. The top teams in the country - Bama, OSU, Clemson - do both really well. Taking the last 2 National Champions, both Bama and LSU could air it out to elite receivers (Jamarr Chase, Devonte Smith), but also had a bruising RB (Clyde Edwards Helaire, Najee Harris) to pound it out when needed. To have a balanced team like that, you need a great OL and QB and skill position players that work well together.
As for defense, the reason we lost against Wisconsin isn't because we are designed to defend speed offenses. It's because Michigan failed to recruit/develop any DTs and were projecting their blitzes to the point that opposing offenses nearly always knew where the pressure was coming from. Good/great defenses have that balance with DLs that can hold against the run/ provide pressure, big and fast LBs that can stop RBs and cover, and fast CBs that can keep up with speedy receivers.
April 29th, 2021 at 11:16 AM ^
You mean a team has to be balanced to win a championship?! And here I thought a stud QB is all one needs.
April 29th, 2021 at 11:19 AM ^
Clyde Edwards-Helaire is a bruising RB? The dude is generously listed at 5'7 and 200 lbs - I think he's a phenomenal back and tough to bring down, but would hardly count him as a bruiser.
Going back to the OPs point, that LSU team was the epitome of the Speed side of the argument. There is a reason that Burrow and those receivers set all kinds of records and it wasn't because they were a balanced offense or knew how to subtly incorporate the finer points of manball -- it's because they schemed to their advantage (speed) and most teams had to cheat (move safeties 15-20 yards deep, double multiple WRs, etc.) in order to not get torched -- then LSU would punish them with screens, draws and heavy doses of Edwards-Helaire
April 29th, 2021 at 11:57 AM ^
That LSU team was fast but definitely wasn’t the epitome of Speed. I won’t dispute that was probably the best top to bottom offense I’ve ever seen, that was the perfection of an Air Raid/Pro passing scheme. They had really good team speed but Joe Burrow was throwing to wide open guys all year too which is scheme. OP’s selection of Oregon is a great example, the old Florida teams with Percy Harvin, Auburn with Cam had great team speed and used it well. Also seemingly any OSU team in recent memory. Honestly the Bama team LSU beat that year was a better display of Speed and getting that speed into beneficial 1on1s.
I honestly don't know what you are basing that on.
LSU's 3 leading WRs were Justin Jefferson, Ja'Marr Chase and Terrace Marshall. Of those 3 - Jefferson was the "slowest" WR with a 4.43 40 time. Chase and Marshall both ran 4.38s -- that is blazing speed any way you look at it (DPJ - who most Michigan fans would agree was a very fast / athletic player ran a 4.48). That team also had two tight ends (Sullivan and Moss) which ran 40s in the 4.6 range (Sullivan was 2nd fastest TE from 2020 NFL combine). Even Edwards-Helaire -- who is not a burner -- ran a respectable 4.6.
You can say that players were open because of scheme (I could easily make the same argument for those Oregon / Florida / Auburn teams), but I think speed makes all the difference for that LSU team. The reason there is space for screens and other quick passes is because teams know that if they press too close and get beat, it will be going to the house.
Oh no, I agree they’re all burners. Not disputing the athletic ability of any of those guys. My point was that they aren’t the first team to have that much collective team speed at skill positions and that the offense that Joe Brady called w/ Emsinger was nuanced but effectively novel especially for the SEC. They were running pro concepts out of NCAA formations and wreaking havoc on every defense sans Auburn. The were getting so many favorable matchups by moving Jefferson, Chase, and Edwards-Helaire around formations that they were getting mismatches on seemingly every down.
An example of that great scheme is Edwards-Helaire’s touchdown before the half against Bama. Another is the 2nd touchdown in the SEC championship game against Georgia. They were playing 3 dimensional chess at times against the what many have called the better defensive minds of the last decade plus (Sagan, Venebales, Smart).
April 29th, 2021 at 11:52 AM ^
The whole concept of power vs. speed is a bit archaic. You really just have to scheme to beat what other teams run. Even though things maybe packaged in a “spread” appearance they’re still running old veer and triple concepts. There’s numerous examples of teams just moving where the QB receives the snap but running the same concepts. Teams still run power, counters, pin and pulls, all that good stuff just from gun.
Defensively, if you can rush 4 effectively and drop 7 you’ll win every time. You lose when you think you have the horses to do this and run a scheme that players can’t execute. Why you’d ever match up a box LB like McCray man to man against an athlete like Saquon is just dumb. Iowa state could play in the B1G and have success against teams like Wisconsin or Iowa and they run a 3-3. The notion that you have to go big on big is dated and inaccurate when you have athletes of this caliber playing the game.
April 29th, 2021 at 12:52 PM ^
Speed v Strength?
4 words:
Florida State Michigan 1991
Thank you.
Miami showed 30+ years ago that you can win with fast, undersized defenders. (p=mv, right?) Part of Michigan's fan base never realized that, though. Wisconsin has an amazing hold on these people, like the OP:
"Recruiting too much speed can lead to getting run over by the manball teams ..."
Other comments have addressed this. Michigan has done a shaky recruiting job at the DT spot. There's not much more to it. Also:
"... where it's much more typical to see a Devin Bush nowadays than a Mike McCray. Those McCrays of the world sure are needed against Wisconsin though!"
No, they're not. They're REALLY not. Devin Bush could be effective against any college team.
Wisconsin has a great system and culture. They're a very good team. They're still significantly behind OSU and other top-tier teams.
Also Michigan vs USC in Rose Bowls 2004 and 2007.
Question: Why does it have to be one or the other? Why not have speed on the perimeter and at the skill positions while still having size/strength in the middle, particularly in the lines? For example, even as Saban has moved to a more open offense with more explosive playmakers at WR, I don't see his offensive and defensive lines getting any smaller. I'm not seeing anyone on Bama's o-line under 315 lbs. And on defense, he runs a 3-4, but all of his d-lineman are over 290lbs. I am seeing more LBs in the 220s and 230s, minus the MIKE, which tends to be more like 250s or 260s, but I'm still seeing size on the lines and speed on the perimeter with the playmakers. And, although I wouldn't call a guy like Najee Harris slow, at 230 lbs as a RB, he's a big, strong back. He's not exactly a scat back.
Another element I forgot to add - how does having a speedy / strong offense enable the defense to play against that style of play with more effectiveness (they play against that style in practice).
If your defense practices against the spread daily, how do you ‘gear up’ for a Wisconsin offense in practice? It would be very difficult to replicate that style of attack and prepare for it effectively if you can’t simulate it - is there an added benefit to being truly multiple from that perspective? You’d think if you have the players to simulate those offenses you’d be more prepared to defend it as well.
It doesn’t matter a ton what your starting offense runs. Your 2-deep on defense is running against scout team day in day out. Spring may be the only time all year you see consistent 1s vs 1s in a full team capacity. This is much less of an issue than you think.
Good to great teams excel at one of these styles. The elite teams excel at both of them, and can gameplan to beat you either way.
Take a look at Alabama. Especially in the past 4-5 years or so. Saban offenses used to be the epitome of establishing power. Having an unstoppable force at the RB position, and while you had elite talent at the WR positions, they really weren't the focal point of your offense. Guys like Julio Jones were there to take the top off the defense when your safeties came too close to the L.O.S. to avoid getting continually gashed by Mark Ingram or Trent Richardson.
Now Saban's teams excel at both. They have 2-3 first round talent receivers like Waddle or Smith who can beat you over the top or across the middle of the field on any given play, and then they have a Derrick Henry, Josh Jacobs or Najee Harris who can run around you, into you, or over you on any given play.
OSU can do the same thing. They can beat us by playing ball control and running us over with RBs, or as we've seen more often than not in the last two tries, by incinerating us to death with speed on the outside.
You want to win titles? You need to be able to do both.
I agree with all your points Perkis, do you think teams that can play both ends of the spectrum well are widening the powerhouse-to-average gap? It seems like the rare teams that are capable of doing both well are truly unique and tough to handle, the examples of LSU and Alabama are perfect.
Do you think those offenses would be even more potent if they went fully specialized and focused on either speed or strength the way Wisconsin does? It’s interesting to me the focus on either balance or specialization. If Alabama put all of their eggs into one side or the other I wonder what kind of monster it would bring.
We can end the thread after your comment, it's spot-on. OSU's offense is built to make the defense pick their poison.. either sell out to stop the run, or get burned on the outside, the middle, or deep by the passing game. Elite offenses have to have both in their bag of tricks, and can adjust as needed to take what the defense is giving them. I usually get to watch OSU do that to B1G teams, but Alabama put on an absolute clinic in the NC game on how to confuse and take advantage of a defense. I'm still not sure if OSU's defensive staff has figured out what Alabama did to them.. four months ago.
The easiest way to do it is to recruit big and fast players, which is obviously easier said than done. But the whole notion of speed vs size is kind of an outdated trope.. you really want both.
30 year HS coach here.My take on this is scheme is overrated.Bottom line is all about making plays.Running into a stacked line is fine if you account for everyone and block it.It is not uncommon to cram it in there and pop one.Bama could line up in the wishbone and maul folks or go 5 wide and maul folks.Comes down to talent level and making plays.Speed in space sounds good but all it comes down to is athletes making plays.
What does Bama do? They seem good. Let's do that.
It's interesting to me to see Michigan's approach change over Harbaugh's time here.
I think he realized a few years ago the same thing Saban did--that ball control football is hard to win with at the top of college football. Teams like Ohio State are going to score and if you don't have an offense that can hold serve and consistently score touchdowns, you end up in a bad spot. If you get behind, things can go sideways quickly.
Hiring Gattis seemed like a move away from ball control smash mouth football towards a pass to run philosophy.
I think the reality is, changing philosophically takes time and the transition has been slower than expected. Michigan had some good, experienced players like Ben Mason that they wanted to get on the field last year, but I don't know that fullbacks and two tight end sets are ideal for a speed in space passing game. I think we'll see a less blended philosophy moving forward as the players that were recruited for Gattis' offense gain experience and move up the depth chart.
To be fair, I don't think we got to really see much of what last year's offense was supposed to be due to so many injuries and the constant shuffling at key positions.
Still, this year the team's personnel seems far better suited to run more of the concepts that Gattis likes. The Moore promotion could have a big impact on the running game concepts as well. I don't think we'll see as much pin and pull this year, for example.
Cade looked pretty comfortable making quick decisions in the short passing game, which makes sense given his background in highschool and the 7 on 7 stuff he excelled at. He's not as physically talented as some guys, but in his limited time on the field, he made an instant impact. There's limited data, but he looked the part when he got his opportunity.
I'm optimistic about this year's offense. I think there's a lot of talent and solid depth at every position. Just gotta put it all together on the field. I believe they're heading in the right direction.
Go Blue!
double post
April 30th, 2021 at 10:02 AM ^
I think it comes down to what realistic options a team has. If you CAN recruit like Bama, LSU, etc then you scheme to be able to play any style and win. If you are Wisconsin or better example Army, you scheme to use the tools in your box to make the other team as uncomfortable as possible and hope you can dictate the game to them long enough to win(before their superior athletes take over) For example, I’d love to drop Navy into OSUs schedule in between Penn st. and MSU. With only a week to prepare against their unique scheme OSU could quickly find themselves in a real battle. A battle they will still win most times BUT.. an untimely turnover or 2 and they could lose to a team that doesn’t have 1 athlete that would make the OSU practice squad.
Similarly, say a Wisconsin vs. Oklahoma matchup in the middle of the season happened. If Wisconsin scores first and gets a stop on Oklahoma’s first possession? It could be ugly for the Big 12 style real fast. Likewise if Wisconsin does not convert and allows Oklahoma to dictate the pace of the game? They are screwed. Styles make fights. Frazier could give Ali all he wanted every time, but couldn’t stay in the ring with Foreman. Meanwhile Ali beats Foreman.
April 30th, 2021 at 10:57 AM ^
Great points Honcho, I agree. You pointed out that teams can also scheme-specialize (Army’s case), which gives its own challenges to a defense.
I’d like to add even more to your point that there are also speed / strength triple option teams (and ones that run varying degrees of misdirection).
I like that you added a possibility of giving OSU fits, imagine having an extremely fast-specializing triple option offense to deal with instead of just a standard balanced one. You also have to rely on quick keys and instincts for your defensive players, and those may not always be the athletes you need for a particularly specializing offense.
I particularly like that we schedule service academies into our schedule, even if it adds great difficulty and strain on our practices and staff/players. I think Michigan should never duck a team just because they’re difficult to prep for, and those service academy gentlemen should have an opportunity to play in the big house in front of 110,000!